ABSTRACT
Objective. To investigate student opinions of team assessment. Methods. University of Maryland Eastern Shore School of Pharmacy first-year (P1) to third-year (P3) students (n=125) completed an online survey regarding team assessments. Students rated their opinions on a Likert scale. Responses were examined using Mann-Whitney U test with respect to academic performance and class. Results. One hundred twenty-five students (75%) completed the survey. A majority of students agreed that team assessment was beneficial (90%). In contrast, 78% of the students perceived that the discussion helped clarify misconceptions. Students were not in agreement on occurrence of free riders (51%) and the use of peer evaluation (38%). Overall, students ranked the benefits of team assessment as improving individual score, then promoting collaboration, followed by enhancing understanding of material. Conclusion. Students had favorable opinions regarding team assessment. Educational benefits of team assessments include enhanced understanding of the material, being a meaningful activity for promoting collaboration, and developing communication skills.
Subject(s)
Cooperative Behavior , Curriculum , Education, Pharmacy/methods , Educational Measurement/methods , Schools, Pharmacy , Students, Pharmacy/psychology , Adolescent , Adult , Curriculum/trends , Education, Pharmacy/trends , Female , Humans , Male , Schools, Pharmacy/trends , Time Factors , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Current guidelines for the correct peak expiratory flow (PEF) maneuver include standing. In the hospital setting, PEF values are often ordered to assess response to asthma therapy for exacerbations. We have observed that the PEF is sometimes performed with the patient in bed. METHODS: Healthy adults performed the PEF maneuver in random order, standing, lying back at an ~45° angle on pillows, and sitting, slumped forward ~10° with legs extended. PEF was recorded for 3 attempts in each of the 3 positions. RESULTS: We enrolled 94 subjects (39 male, 55 female, mean age 24 y) in 2011. Mean PEF in the standing position (669 ± 42 L/min) was significantly higher than in the lying back (621 ± 42 L/min) (P < .001) and sitting (615 ± 42 L/min) positions in males (P < .001), and, similarly, in females, standing produced a significantly higher mean PEF (462 ± 42 L/min) than the lying back (422 ± 42 L/min) (P < .001) and sitting (447 ± 42 L/min) positions (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should ensure that PEF is obtained with patients out of bed and in the standing position.
